Inspire me with your 6x6 b/w photos please!

I scan all my negatives on an Epson 4990.
All of the Epsons from the 2450 on (3200,
4180, 4490, 4990 and I've probably missed
a few) give about the same performance,
in my experience. They are all very good.
 
both shot w/ a rollei 2.8e3 on tmax.

4506400198_c7473116e0.jpg


4505693221_f27391e657.jpg
 
Thanks for the answers guys.I was on photo.net earlier and all they were doing was trashing the flatbed scanners.I'm in the market for a new scanner for medium format (either the epson V600 or the V700) and these scanners,according to all at that site are garbage. You guys all seem to get good scans so I had to ask.
 
They're all on drugs over there. You can get
bad scans from a flatbed, if you don't know
how to use one. Like any tool, you have to
learn its quirks and work around them. But
I have been very pleased with the Epsons.
Once I bought a dedicated MF film scanner
(the Microtek 120tf) but sold it and went back
to the Epson -- the Microtek was too sharp
for my tastes, and created scans with harsh
defined grain, that I do not see in my prints
(I print in the darkroom). So I went back to
the Epson, because it gave more continuous
tones akin to what I get from the enlarger.

The fetish of comparing MTF chart samples
only gets you so far. The scan itself is what
matters.
 
Sanders McNew said:
the Microtek was too sharp
for my tastes, and created scans with harsh
defined grain, that I do not see in my prints
(I print in the darkroom).
Click to expand...

I think this was the same as the Polaroid scanner? I get exactly the same problem with my Coolscan IV. For conventional mono film I think the V750 is way better.
 
photo_fred said:
Thanks for the answers guys.I was on photo.net earlier and all they were doing was trashing the flatbed scanners.I'm in the market for a new scanner for medium format (either the epson V600 or the V700) and these scanners,according to all at that site are garbage. You guys all seem to get good scans so I had to ask.
Click to expand...

If someone had asked me 6 or 7 months ago what I thought about using a flatbed scanner for medium format film I would of told them don't waste your time. But since starting to use the Newton Glass MF holder from http://www.betterscanning.com/ I love the results I'm getting.
 
Last edited:
Rolleicord Vb+Rolleinar 3
Balda Super Baldax
Black Magic liguid emulsion
 

Attachments

  • BlackMagic001 (1).jpg
    BlackMagic001 (1).jpg
    154.1 KB · Views: 0
  • BlackMagic003 (1).jpg
    BlackMagic003 (1).jpg
    153.1 KB · Views: 0
  • BlackMagic002 (4).jpg
    BlackMagic002 (4).jpg
    154.7 KB · Views: 0
Mcary said:
If someone had asked me 6 or 7 months ago what I thought about using a flatbed scanner for medium format film I would of told them don't waste your time. But since starting to use the Newton Glass MF holder from http://www.betterscanning.com/ I love the results I'm getting.
Click to expand...

I've had my V750 for a few years now and initially I used to post to forums about scanning. After a while, however, I stopped doing this because of the barrage of criticism from people who maintaned that it was impossible to get decent results from a flatbed, despite never having used the V750.

The glass from betterscanning.com is very useful for 35mm, which tends to curl, but I haven't found it necessary for most 120 film. No doubt some makes curl more than others but the Delta 400 I've been using recently doesn't curl at all.

Because the glass gives you more surfaces to keep clean I tend to batch scan my negative strips to produce 'contact sheets' and then use the glass for re-scanning just the best negs. It's quite time-consuming and unless I'm making a print I tend not to bother. However, the difference in shapness is noticable at higher enlargements.
 
I'm just returning seriously to the square after a long time with rectangles. This one has gotten the most response:

552315.jpg

Rollei FW / FP4+
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom